Heat and Energy Efficiency Technical Suitability Assessment: consultation analysis

Q5 Best Approach to Address Gaps in Methodologies required for a HEETSA

66 respondents provided answers, often making multiple comments. The feedback reflects Question 4 responses generally recommending that existing methodologies should be used more robustly rather than a need to develop new methodologies.

The need for Leadership

Many responses referenced the need for leadership in developing new methodologies.

• In general, it was suggested that the Scottish Government should lead on the development of new methodologies. The gaps should be identified through consultation e.g. to avoid overlapping methodologies and duplication of effort. Examples of gaps included methodologies for complex or underrepresented building types, such as traditionally constructed and mixed tenure buildings. Only a few responses appeared to suggest a market-led solution.
• These new methodologies should be delivered by the market e.g. industry and/or academic providers. This should help ensure any new methodologies are technically sound, practical to apply, and aligned with existing professional standards. The common suggestion was for government to fund the development of these new methodologies.
• New methodologies should be complemented by leveraging existing market methodologies where available and robust.
• Throughout there should be collaboration e.g. with professional bodies and those delivering or researching retrofit.

Build on Existing Standards and Processes

Some respondents recommended building on existing standards and processes.

• There was a call for HEETSA to integrate and build on existing processes and methodologies rather than reinvent them. This included aligning with UK standards such as PAS 2035, PAS 2038, BS 40104, and BS 5250. Several of these respondents particularly emphasised that outcomes should be verified e.g. through pre and post installation performance measurement.
• A formal gap analysis and mapping exercise should systematically identify where existing standards are inadequate or missing.
• There was a need to unify assessment requirements under a standard robust assessment framework. A single integrated building document should be an outcome of a HEETSA assessment.

Supporting Skills, Competence, and Professional Capacity

Some respondents referenced the necessary skills needs. They cited the current skills gap and the need for investment in building skills, training, and capacity. Competent, qualified professionals should carry out retrofit design and coordination (as well as assessment). It was noted that advice is being given to consumers from individuals and organisations with insufficient competence.

A few respondents specified stated that the Scottish Government should identify the technical knowledge needed for assessing complex building types. There was a suggestion of the need to develop a comprehensive qualification framework to address the current compartmentalisation of skills.

There were a few references to the government maintaining oversight of competence through a central validation, accreditation, and registration system.

Innovation, Funding, and Market Support

A few respondents recognised that filling methodological gaps requires investment in innovation, and research and development. Solutions proposed include new digital applications and measurement technologies.

Whilst not specific to the methodology itself, a few respondents stressed the need for funding to assist homeowners in meeting the costs of assessment and retrofit upgrades. Without adequate funding even the best methodologies risk being underused.

Finally, a few respondents urged the need to balance client cost and complexity in defining the assessment methodology. It is important that the system remains accessible and proportionate to the project scale as well as having in-built flexibility.